Observing Article 3c of GA#633, which forbids participants in cases concerning "any published investment research" (hereinafter "PIR") in "any member state" from including "the direction of any proprietary or client positions taken by any institution" in their evidence,
Recognising that, in certain cases (hereinafter "illegal investments"), investments can be used in clear violation of either domestic law (such as investing in a business whose sole purpose is to extract fossil fuels where the member state in question requires all investors to divest from such investments) or World Assembly law (such as investing in a business in a member state which is being sanctioned under Article IV.4 of GA#440 "Administrative Compliance Act" and for which there is no reason under currently-active laws passed before GA#440 to invest in it),
Concerned that, where an investor in a certain member state makes illegal investments as a result of PIR intended purely for domestic consumption whose authors were directed to recommend such investments in their PIR, there is no means of bringing to justice any entity involved with that PIR via that member's courts (particularly on the grounds that the entity recommended those investments and thus encouraged domestic investors to violate laws), but instead only via some court of the WA, because Article 3c regulates "litigation pending before any member state,"
Affirming that the only WA courts currently in existence are those of the World Assembly Judiciary Committee, which may choose to accept or reject cases about such directions at their sole pleasure (per Article 2 of GA#466 "World Assembly Justice Accord"), thus making the prospect of any legal remedy in relation to such directions - even on an international level - uncertain by definition,
Adding that - since only an institution can commission investment research and only analysts can write it, per GA#633's definitions - this incentivises actors in member states wishing to violate WA sanctions to:
- lobby their member state to introduce only wafer-thin regulations on analysts, their qualifications and financial institutions, because GA#633 requires member states to ensure that analysts are "regulated and qualified" and demands that an institution be "a financial institution regulated by at least one member state" without it or any other WA law defining how such regulation or qualification be attained,
- create their own "financial institution" and pack its "research department" with their own hand-picked "analysts" once this has happened,
- commission those analysts, via their financial institution, to write a report on how to make investments that violate WA sanctions, and to make it clear that they are supporting the position the institution is taking in favour of violating WA sanctions, and
- have them publish that report, then distribute it to all qualified investors in that member state, and finally sit back and relax as droves of investors make corresponding investments that violate WA sanctions, safe in the knowledge that they might not even be charged over (never mind convicted for) promoting or making illegal investments, and
Hopeful that this repeal will pave the way for improved future legislation which specifically aims at protecting investment research, rather than shielding those who recommend illegal investments in the process...
The General Assembly hereby repeals GA#633 "Independent investment Research Protocol."
